Posted
by
Unknown Lamer
on Wednesday May 14, 2014 @11:38AM
from the fifth-dimensional-hyper-worm dept.

KentuckyFC (1144503) writes "There is growing evidence that the center of the Milky Way contains a mysterious object some 4 million times more massive than the Sun. Many astronomers believe that this object, called Sagittarius A*, is a supermassive black hole that was crucial in the galaxy's birth and formation. The thinking is that about 100 million years after the Big Bang, this supermassive object attracted the gas and dust that eventually became the Milky Way. But there is a problem with this theory--100 million years is not long enough for a black hole to grow so big. The alternative explanation is that Sagittarius A* is a wormhole that connects the Milky Way to another region of the universe or even a another multiverse. Cosmologists have long known that wormholes could have formed in the instants after the Big Bang and that these objects would have been preserved during inflation to appear today as supermassive objects hidden behind an event horizon, like black holes. It's easy to imagine that it would be impossible to tell these objects apart. But astronomers have now worked out that wormholes are smaller than black holes and so bend light from an object orbiting close to them, such as a plasma cloud, in a unique way that reveals their presence. They've even simulated what such a wormhole will look like. No telescope is yet capable of resolving images like these but that is set to change too. An infrared instrument called GRAVITY is currently being prepared for the Very Large Telescope Interferometer in Chile and should be in a position to spot the signature of a wormhole, if it is there, in the next few years."

The point here is that the concept of a worm-hole has been theoretical and the domain of Sci-Fi. It is a huge event if we are able to verify. My guess is that the verification will have ramifications in the theoretical physics, simply because so much has been strictly theory.

Which is why many species evolved collaboration. Evolution doesn't always mean killing competitors. Some species(particularly humans) do extremely well by turning competitors into collaborators and developing mutually beneficial relationships.

If your stupidity and belief system requires you to attempt to destroy my way of life, then you are a threat to me.

The Christians who want to teach intelligent design, the Muslims who advocate Jihad, and the morons who fight against vaccination based on a discredited report, and those who think tax cuts for the rich and trickle down economics is real and effective... these people are all dangerous idiots who think their belief system trumps facts, that some how god is on their side, and that we should all adhere to the bullshit rules they believe in.

They are advocating for my destruction, so it's really only rational to advocate for theirs.

Many many Christians are no better than the Taliban in their desire to force the rest of us to follow their rules.

So, yeah, fuck the whole lot of them. Putting ignorance and stupidity on a podium is a sign of lunacy.

Why do you think that having an absurd childish belief is simply disagreeing with his view, rather than seeing it as the deep ignorance that it is?
Religious idiocy wouldn't be a problem, but malicious people are able to use it to get rubes to vote for insane anti-social right-wing loonies.

I recommend that we gather up all the world's warrior mentality politicians who are always dragging people into wars and bullshit, put them in uniforms, and send them on a mission through the event horizon to determine if there's another world on the other side of the wormhole, or if they just get squished like bugs.

Somebody has to do it: solve the Schroedinger question. Is it a wormhole or a black hole? Or is it a quantum object that changes between the two randomly as you observe it?

While I largely agree with the sentiment, this story is not one of them.

There are peculiar solutions to the field equations of GR, including wormholes and black holes. Whether any of these solutions can be physically realized has been one of the most interesting questions in both observational and theoretical cosmology for decades. The possibility of detecting the difference between a supermassive black hole and a wormhole at the centre of the galaxy is definitely nerd-worthy, although I agree the hype is, uh, over-hyped.

Furthermore, these stories give lay-people a bit of insight into how science--which is the discipline of publicly testing ideas by systematic observation, controlled experiment and Bayesian inference--actually works.

Remember when the existence of black holes was still hotly debated, back in the '70's? Observations on an very small object with a mass of more than 1.4 solar masses (the theoretical upper limit for neutron stars) resulted in a general acceptance that it was a black hole, which likely therefore exist. But that conclusion was contingent on a lack of other plausible alternatives, and so is subject to modification as other alternatives become more plausible...

"Even the Jihadists are really not likely ever to personally cause you harm."

The day before 9/11 you likely would have said the same to everyone personally harmed in 9/11 or through the loss of someone in 9/11.

"So apparently simply disagreeing with you is threatening to destroy your way of life?"

I think he is pointing out that those who disagree on these particular topics (which for the most part are factually established and not really legitimately open to debate) are as a group taking action to impose their views on others or tangibly impede education and/or progress in our society. In some cases even reverse it.

" The photographer who didn't want to work for a gay wedding, the baker who didn't want to make a cake for a gay wedding reception, the companies who don't want to pay for abortifacients; all examples of theists being made to break their own rules."

No, no they are not. They are cases of theists imposing their rules on others or punishing them for not following the theists rules. There is no religion I am aware of which forbids photographing or feeding gay people. There is also no religion which forbids providing healthcare. Following your own rules means deciding whether YOU are okay with yourself being gay, not your clients, not your children, not your hairdresser, you and you alone. The same with whether or not you are going to get an abortion or use contraception or take advantage of any other medical procedure.

Refusing services to others simply because their rules are different than yours and thus they are gay or opt for an abortion is imposing your rules on them. It's your place to support the idea that everyone gets to pick their own rules. It's not your place to provide or withdraw support based on which rules someone else follows. It's simply none of your business.

On a recent poll about 1/3 in the USA believe in a young earth (10,000 years or less) and do not believe in natural evolution[1]. About half of the Christian believe that Jesus will come back in the next 40 years[2]. This is pure asinine to any reasonable long term policy and if not tamed could very well doom us all, especially because those believes comes from a first world country, that is military and economically superior. In addition, you have millions of delusional Christians that think WWIII will speed up the second coming of Jesus[3][4].

Moreover, if being religious is deeply ignorant, you should be able to provide strong evidence against the existence of a God. Not just point to a lack of evidence you like, but evidence against it.

First, that proves for me your ignorance of logic. You demand to prove a negative, which is a logical fallacy. Second, absence of evidence is evidence for absence. For example, if I make the claim that I have a cat in my house and you come over and look everywhere for my cat and you don't find anything, that is strong evidence that I lied and that I have no cats. The same is for God or for gods.